Broccoli

[DinoDoc]

From what it appears to me, Chief Justice Roberts POV is still unascertainable and I read a lot of stuff prior to oral arguments that he may vote to uphold it. So I think the right wing champagne cork popping is slightly premature.

History says John Roberts not likely swing vote

Think Chief Justice John Roberts might be the fifth vote to uphold President Barack Obama's health care law? History says: think again.

Roberts has never joined with the four liberal justices in a case that pitted them against the court's entire conservative wing, according to Kedar Bhatia, an Emory University law student who tracks the justices' voting patterns for Scotusblog.

And only once has Roberts made a five-judge majority with the liberals, a 2006 case called Jones v. Flowers, about the notice required before a home was sold to satisfy a tax lien. (Opinions here.) Roberts did write the majority opinion in that case, which was decided 5-to-3, with Justice Samuel Alito recused.

Roberts is known to prefer that the court issue consensus opinions, but history shows that when he fails at that, he tends to side with his conservative brethren and almost never with the court's liberal wing.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/03/history-says-john-roberts-not-likely-swing-vote-118920.html

[Felch]

Yeah, his name is Ron Paul.

X-post. Obviously

[SlowwHand]

Obama is such a dork.

Obama OKs oil exploration on Atlantic, but not drilling - 2 hours ago

[Aeson]

That's what I would do... let them explore. Once they find it, they'll be willing to pay a lot more bribes campaign contributions to start drilling than if they didn't know it was already there.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Don't belive what Alpert says - I do actually understand english - just wanted to stretch Ogies "conspiracy theory" a bit

I wasn't so much commenting on the veracity of the so called conspiracy theory, merely the monumental stupidity of making enemies for no good reason. Especially ones that hold your legacy's fate in their hands.

[BlackCat]

I wasn't so much commenting on the veracity of the so called conspiracy theory, merely the monumental stupidity of making enemies for no good reason. Especially ones that hold your legacy's fate in their hands.

True, making enemies is a stupid thing unless it's for a reason (wich is irrelevant here). Though, I expect a supreme court judge to be above such - if not she should be kicked out..

[SlowwHand]

That's what I would do... let them explore. Once they find it, they'll be willing to pay a lot more bribes campaign contributions to start drilling than if they didn't know it was already there.

I don't think it's upfront and honest.

[Aeson]

I don't think it's upfront and honest.

That's what makes it politics

[SlowwHand]

OK,let me put it this way. It should be clandestine so as to not be so obnoxious in the insinuation that all are too stupid to realize the ploy.
Does that work for you, mullet?

[Aeson]

The more outrageous the better! (for mullets and politicians)

[Tupac Shakur]

We will see if the court is going to stretch the commerce clause to the point of destroying the 10th Amendment.

The Court did that a long time ago.

[Hauldren Collider]

Isn't car insurance compulsory? If not, isn't the same argument valid against that (or is that argument rebutted by saying that you don't have to buy a car)?

Car insurance is forced upon you by the state government, not federal.

[Hauldren Collider]

If any such states exist they'll be down south.

No, more likely they'd be out west and rural, like Idaho or Montana.

[Hauldren Collider]

The Court did that a long time ago.

They may get a chance to redeem themselves with this case, though.

[Felch]

Damn it, New Hampshire is neither south nor west.